An Expert Witness Statement.
- Thread starter alexb123
- Start date
I have it on good authority ( Spud Empress is a lawyer) that this is absolutely the case.
Spud, could you further ask the spudette a question? Will just give a some more details.
In this case the EW may have just made a mistake in so much as he has failed to account for an important test result. So, it may not have been an intentional act and therefore it would not classify as perjury. However, if I were to make him aware of this omission and he still failed to adjust his report accordingly, would this then be perjury?
The report has already been submitted as evidence and the case has failed solely on this evidence. So does he still have a duty to make this amendment? His signed declaration states that "I shall notify my instructing solicitors immediately in writing if for any reason I consider that my original report requires amendment;"
The reason that many of the problems with the report were not brought before the hearing was due to the EW making a lot of delays, misdirections, lies and very bad communication (often totally ignoring letters) . I complained to him regarding his conduct and he then withdrew from the claim (post-hearing), without giving any explanation as to why, other than "I had lost trust in him". His own protocol stipulates that he has a duty to give a full explanation for his withdrawal. The Tribunal then allowed him to withdraw (although on seeking legal advice both myself and the respondent came to the conclusion that he could not withdraw at that stage). Any chance you could gauge a view on this as well?
I know this is complex but I'm very lost on what is happening here, I fully understand that any views given would purely be opinion. I would be very grateful for any advice on this!!
In this case the EW may have just made a mistake in so much as he has failed to account for an important test result. So, it may not have been an intentional act and therefore it would not classify as perjury. However, if I were to make him aware of this omission and he still failed to adjust his report accordingly, would this then be perjury?
The report has already been submitted as evidence and the case has failed solely on this evidence. So does he still have a duty to make this amendment? His signed declaration states that "I shall notify my instructing solicitors immediately in writing if for any reason I consider that my original report requires amendment;"
The reason that many of the problems with the report were not brought before the hearing was due to the EW making a lot of delays, misdirections, lies and very bad communication (often totally ignoring letters) . I complained to him regarding his conduct and he then withdrew from the claim (post-hearing), without giving any explanation as to why, other than "I had lost trust in him". His own protocol stipulates that he has a duty to give a full explanation for his withdrawal. The Tribunal then allowed him to withdraw (although on seeking legal advice both myself and the respondent came to the conclusion that he could not withdraw at that stage). Any chance you could gauge a view on this as well?
I know this is complex but I'm very lost on what is happening here, I fully understand that any views given would purely be opinion. I would be very grateful for any advice on this!!
ThinkingMansCrumpet
Registered Member
The Laws of Evidence are not uniform across domestic Courts let alone internationally. Which court is your case being heard in? From your post, it sounds like it may be an administrative tribunal of some description.
An expert witness is just that, an expert. Regardless of whether the expert has been hired by your legal team, they will offer their opinion based on what they consider relevant to the facts within the brief. You are paying for their time, not for their opinion and therefore, unlike TV, an expert witness cannot be coerced into barracking for your side or argument. Although, it would be unusual for an expert to be hired unless there was a point to be scored for your own side.
As you've said the case has already failed on the evidence tabled/heard during the hearing, there's not much that can be done. However, if and only if (and it does not sound like this is the case) the expert concedes there was a mistake or ommission in their original report, you would most probably be at liberty to file an appeal within the mandated time for the case. This is the likely scenario in Australia anyway. I have only practiced international law in the US and am unfamiliar with domestic legislation.
You do seem to have lost trust in your EW. Delays are inevitable always but to represent your EW as telling 'lies' is a serious matter and shows a complete erosion of confidence in her/him. As such, I agree with your EW that it would be best if you found a new EW that you do trust and whom you feel is impartial. It is unlilely that this one can remain so if there has been conflict between you.
Why is it that you're speaking with the EW directly? Are you self represented? Why are you and the respondent coming to conclusions together? The respondent is on the other side and you should only be speaking to them via your solcitor or barrister. Is this a Family Law matter?
I believe LearnedHand is an attorney practicing in the US and your best bet would be to PM him. Hope this helps.
An expert witness is just that, an expert. Regardless of whether the expert has been hired by your legal team, they will offer their opinion based on what they consider relevant to the facts within the brief. You are paying for their time, not for their opinion and therefore, unlike TV, an expert witness cannot be coerced into barracking for your side or argument. Although, it would be unusual for an expert to be hired unless there was a point to be scored for your own side.
As you've said the case has already failed on the evidence tabled/heard during the hearing, there's not much that can be done. However, if and only if (and it does not sound like this is the case) the expert concedes there was a mistake or ommission in their original report, you would most probably be at liberty to file an appeal within the mandated time for the case. This is the likely scenario in Australia anyway. I have only practiced international law in the US and am unfamiliar with domestic legislation.
You do seem to have lost trust in your EW. Delays are inevitable always but to represent your EW as telling 'lies' is a serious matter and shows a complete erosion of confidence in her/him. As such, I agree with your EW that it would be best if you found a new EW that you do trust and whom you feel is impartial. It is unlilely that this one can remain so if there has been conflict between you.
Why is it that you're speaking with the EW directly? Are you self represented? Why are you and the respondent coming to conclusions together? The respondent is on the other side and you should only be speaking to them via your solcitor or barrister. Is this a Family Law matter?
I believe LearnedHand is an attorney practicing in the US and your best bet would be to PM him. Hope this helps.
Last edited:
ThinkingMansCrumpet
Registered Member
I think you should confine your comments to things you know about John. You watch too much TV. In the real world, expert witnesses get paid for their time, not their testimony or opinion.
Alex has asked for assistance and your comment contributes nothing to the discussion.
oh, i am sorry...sooo sorry for answering. next time i will ask you for ok.
everyone who gets paid is getting paid for their time and that includes giving testimony and that means testimony in court.
Thinkingman thank you for the reply. The court hearing this case is an Employment Tribunal in England.
I am speaking with him (EW)directly as I am litigate-in-person and he is employed as Single Joint. The reason that myself and defendant are in agreement that he could not withdraw is that we both researched and came to the same conclusion rather than us agreeing.
It has never even been established if he has attempted to withdraw the report. Surely, if he has withdraw the report then it become inadmissible? Also, by withdrawing he must have withdrawn the report as it is the only tangible aspect he can withdraw?
I am speaking with him (EW)directly as I am litigate-in-person and he is employed as Single Joint. The reason that myself and defendant are in agreement that he could not withdraw is that we both researched and came to the same conclusion rather than us agreeing.
It has never even been established if he has attempted to withdraw the report. Surely, if he has withdraw the report then it become inadmissible? Also, by withdrawing he must have withdrawn the report as it is the only tangible aspect he can withdraw?
ThinkingMansCrumpet
Registered Member
It's acutally ThinkingMansCrumpet meaning I'm a chick so let's get that straight. It's a mouthful so TMC will do.
If it's England, that makes it easier. The laws of the Commonwealth are not dissimilar and it is would not be permissable for the EW to withdraw the report AFTER it has been presented. Were you presenting evidence through affidavit only or by affidavit and cross?
You have stated that the case failed on the basis of the report which would suggest to me that it was presented. Correct?
Sorry about the gender mix up, oops.
The report was used at the hearing but the EW was never asked to attend the hearing. This was mainly due to him delaying contact with me until the final week of the hearing. I had to contact his governing body and ask them to prompt him to reply, which he did but then he delayed by another 2 weeks. In fact it was at this point that I proved he has lied, regarding the timing of an important email.
I also did not attend the hearing due to the stress caused by the EW. I was not able to work on my case and deal with his misconduct at the same time. He already knew from my medical records that my health would be negatively affected by the legal process.
So yes the report was presented and was the main (if not only) reason for the case to fail.
The report was used at the hearing but the EW was never asked to attend the hearing. This was mainly due to him delaying contact with me until the final week of the hearing. I had to contact his governing body and ask them to prompt him to reply, which he did but then he delayed by another 2 weeks. In fact it was at this point that I proved he has lied, regarding the timing of an important email.
I also did not attend the hearing due to the stress caused by the EW. I was not able to work on my case and deal with his misconduct at the same time. He already knew from my medical records that my health would be negatively affected by the legal process.
So yes the report was presented and was the main (if not only) reason for the case to fail.
ThinkingMansCrumpet
Registered Member
Sounds like grounds to appeal especially if you can prove your allegations that the EW lied about timing.
I STRESS that this in not legal advice. It's just an opinion based on the info you have provided. No one would be able to offer you clear advice without reviewing the full facts of the matter. I strongly encourage you to obtain some legal advice, either paid or through legal aid. Do you belong to a Union as they would be able to assist in such an issue unless of course, your beef is with them.
Good night.
I STRESS that this in not legal advice. It's just an opinion based on the info you have provided. No one would be able to offer you clear advice without reviewing the full facts of the matter. I strongly encourage you to obtain some legal advice, either paid or through legal aid. Do you belong to a Union as they would be able to assist in such an issue unless of course, your beef is with them.
Good night.
TMC fully respect that this is opinion, thanks for the guidance.
No union, just me on this one.
You say that the report cannot be withdrawn, so can I take it that the expert therefore cannot withdraw? What obligation does the EW have to amend errors post judgment?
No union, just me on this one.
You say that the report cannot be withdrawn, so can I take it that the expert therefore cannot withdraw? What obligation does the EW have to amend errors post judgment?
There was a big criminal case in the UK regarding an EW. On his evidence a mother was convicted of killing her baby's. Later on the conviction was overturned as his evidence was not safe. The mother was released and died within a few years, she drank herself to death. She was only about 40. Very sad story!